Posted by frances arnone on 10/11/13 12:43pm
Msg #487769

$500k e&o

What is going on with companies FNF in particular wanting $500K e&o, has anyone ever filed a claim. IMO I think it might be a ploy to get more business for NNA. Comments?

Reply by Darlin_AL on 10/11/13 1:58pm
Msg #487776

the seem happy w/my orig $25K E&O ??? n/m

Reply by Don Courtney on 10/11/13 2:25pm
Msg #487779

I have been on the FNF list for years and they have only required $100k e&o...has this changed?
They did just annouce a NNA background check requirement for certain lenders.

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 10/11/13 2:40pm
Msg #487781

E&O is not required in AZ. I just tell companies that I am self-insured. That works for them and me.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/11/13 2:45pm
Msg #487784

Technically, E&O isn't *required* in any state

Self-insured? Exactly what does that mean -- and do they accept that and request proof?

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 10/11/13 3:05pm
Msg #487789

Re: Technically, E&O isn't *required* in any state

Self-insured means that I have enough money to pay for it. They don't ask for proof. I bet they probably don't efven know what that means. I would not show them "proof". My finances are none of their business.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/11/13 3:38pm
Msg #487796

Then you mean your private insured...

and why wouldn't you show them proof that you have the required professional liability coverage?

Reply by JanelWI on 10/11/13 3:23pm
Msg #487794

I am not sure if this is true in this case. But I successfully signed a Provident Loan and they rejected it because I did not have $500 in my own E&O and I was not a direct employee of LSI. I am not sure who LSI ended up getting to re-sign the loan and I got my full fee for going and signing it....but it was an eye opener. The title company (after the fact) told me, they were told by Provident that you had to be an employee of a title company or entity that carried the correct E&O amount $500 per occurrence or more; if not an employee then we as IC's we needed to have a minimum of $500 E&O per occurrence. I am not sure if this is going to become a trend. I really hope not since work has slowed so dramatically.

Reply by Marazz/AZ on 10/11/13 8:07pm
Msg #487819

E&O covers mistakes, not fraud. I'm trying to envision what mistake a notary could make, that could result in a liability anywhere near that.

IMHO this is a knee-jerk over-reaction in the industry after years of being lax about the things that really matter. Everyone now wants to show that they are doing extra due diligence and being responsible, this is just smoke and mirrors to show how great they are.

And a more sinister trend is to go after insurance on loans gone bad, so just make everyone carry high insurance then we can sue them later (assuming they are still in business and carrying the same policy years later).

Of course this is a personal decision but insurance is for you, not your clients. I would think twice about any client who wants to make sure they have everything the need to sue me before I've even done any work with them.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/11/13 8:58pm
Msg #487821

I'm thinking they don't get that E&O only covers actual <notarizations> and maybe the assumption is that signing agent coverage is included??

I don't know - it just seems that high amounts like that are for notaries who should be commissioned as something else instead . . . only so many errors one can make in a notarization: forget to sign or put correct venue - but my stamp has everything else - well, not date!*


*I found it helpful to have a stamp on hand <without> my comm exp. I still have one I can use even after renewing my commission last month

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/11/13 9:02pm
Msg #487822

To clarify stamp: My commission expires ________ n/m

Reply by VT_Syrup on 10/12/13 10:28am
Msg #487857

As for mistakes we could make, add to the list using an acknowledgement certificate supplied by the client that does not contain the name of the signer. In my state, an acknowledgement certificate must state the name of the signer(s) to be valid. Not so for a jurat for an oath.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/12/13 3:38pm
Msg #487893

jurat and ack cert

thanks for bringing that out - as I wouldn't have thought states' requirements would differ there (what if jurat states, "personally appeared," in addition to the sworn/subscribed . . .?)

Reply by MW/VA on 10/11/13 9:33pm
Msg #487828

It's been my experience that the $500K was covered under

the policy of the tc or ss. This has been discussed before. It's an absurd amt. for individual NSA's to carry.

Reply by frances arnone on 10/12/13 8:34am
Msg #487849

Re: It's been my experience that the $500K was covered under

When I explained that i have $100k insurance coverage and not planning on increasing, the answer was "okay we're good to go" plus I have no intention of renewing my NNA certification that expired a few years back, again I got an okay. IMO it is a scam for NNA to make more $$$$$$